Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib as beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an adjusted indirect meta-analysis and systematic review.

ABSTRACT: Background:The evidence base for optimum third-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is not conclusive. Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of regorafenib as third-line therapy in mCRC. This indirect meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of regorafenib with other available third-line therapies for mCRC. Methods:A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib, regorafenib, TAS-102, and nintedanib as third-line therapies in patients with mCRC. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were the primary outcomes, while objective response rate (ORR) and safety were the secondary outcomes. Hazard ratio (HR) and relative risk (RR) with their respective 95% confidence interval (CI) were used for analysis of survival, clinical response, and safety data. An adjusted indirect meta-analysis with placebo as the common comparator was performed. Results:We identified eight RCTs comparing regorafenib (two studies), fruquintinib (two studies), TAS-102 (three studies), and nintedanib (one study) against placebo. The OS with regorafenib was significantly better when compared with nintedanib (HR?=?0.66; 95% CI: 0.45, 0.95, p?=?0.02) but was similar to that of fruquintinib (HR?=?1.01; 95% CI: 0.67, 1.52, p?=?0.94) and TAS-102 (HR?=?0.97; 95% CI: 0.68, 1.38, p?=?0.88). The PFS and ORR for regorafenib were slightly better than those of TAS-102 (PFS: HR?=?0.86, 95% CI: 0.54, 1.37, p?=?0.5; ORR: RR?=?1.13, 95% CI: 0.11, 11.05, p?=?0.92) and nintedanib (PFS: HR?=?0.68, 95% CI: 0.42, 1.10, p?=?0.12; ORR: not reported) but were lower than those for fruquintinib (PFS: HR?=?1.53, 95% CI: 0.93, 2.52, p?=?0.08; ORR: RR?=?0.68269, 95% CI: 0.045, 10.32, p?=?0.79). Safety analysis showed that the RR of adverse events (AEs) was lesser in patients treated with regorafenib in comparison with that in patients treated with fruquintinib, but was similar to that in patients treated with nintedanib and TAS-102. Conclusion:Regorafenib has efficacy similar to that of TAS-102 and better safety when compared with fruquintinib. Considering the mechanism of action of regorafenib, which targets multiple factors in the angiogenic pathway, it could be an ideal option for treatment in the beyond second-line setting.

SUBMITTER: Wu Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7364795 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib as beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an adjusted indirect meta-analysis and systematic review.

Wu Yinying Y Fan Yangwei Y Dong Danfeng D Dong Xuyuan X Hu Yuan Y Shi Yu Y Jing Jiayu J Li Enxiao E

Therapeutic advances in medical oncology 20200715

<h4>Background</h4>The evidence base for optimum third-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is not conclusive. Recent studies have demonstrated the efficacy of regorafenib as third-line therapy in mCRC. This indirect meta-analysis compared the efficacy and safety of regorafenib with other available third-line therapies for mCRC.<h4>Methods</h4>A literature search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies evaluating t ...[more]

PMID: 32728393

Similar Datasets

Project description:Regorafenib is an orally administered multikinase inhibitor that has been approved for patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Even though regorafenib significantly improved survival in two international phase 3 trials (CORRECT and CONCUR), a high rate of treatment-related toxic effects and dose modifications were observed with a modest benefit. The aim of this study was to provide information concerning the efficacy, safety, and cost of regorafenib in patients with mCRC in clinical practice.We retrospectively reviewed patients treated with regorafenib monotherapy for unresectable mCRC in five Franche-Comté cancer hospitals (France). The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were safety and descriptive cost analyses of patients treated with regorafenib in clinical practice. Another aim of this study was to assess the impact of regorafenib prescription on the risk of hospitalization in real-life practice.From January 2014 to August 2014, 29 consecutive patients were enrolled. Patients were heavily pretreated and were refractory to standard chemotherapies. The primary tumor sites were the colon and the rectum for 55% and 45% of patients, respectively. Fifteen patients (51%) harbored an RAS mutation. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group - Performance Status (PS) was 0-1 for 86% of patients and 2 for 14% of patients. Nineteen patients (66%) initially received reduced doses of 120 or 80 mg/day. The median duration of treatment was 2.5 months (range, 0.13-11.4 months). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 86% of patients. The most frequent adverse events of any grade were fatigue (35%), diarrhea (20%), and hand-foot skin reaction (20%). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 10 patients (35%). Three patients (10%) were admitted to hospital due to drug-related severe adverse events. The mean cost of patient management with regorafenib for the duration of treatment was 9908 ± 8191€, and median cost was 7917€ (Interquartile range (IQR) 4469-13,042). The median overall survival was six months (95% confidence interval, five to eight months).The safety and efficacy of regorafenib in heavily pretreated mCRC patients was comparable, in our study, to prospective and retrospective trials. Toxic effects were mostly manageable in an outpatient setting. Regorafenib itself represented the most important (93%) part of supported costs. Even though most side effects were manageable in an outpatient setting, severe adverse events occurred from hospitalization in 10% of patients. These data should be confirmed in a larger real-life-based cohort. Identification of predictive biomarkers is needed for mCRC patient selection for regorafenib treatment.

Project description:BackgroundFruquintinib and regorafenib have been approved for the third-line therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in China. However, at present, there is a lack of head-to-head clinical trials on the comparison of efficacy and safety between the two drugs.Materials and methodsThe data of patients with mCRC who were treated with fruquintinib or regorafenib after the standard chemotherapy in Zhejiang Provincial People's Hospital from October 2018 to November 2021 were collected and analyzed. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events. The secondary endpoints were the appropriate sequence, objective remission rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) of fruquintinib and regorafenib.ResultsA total of 105 patients were enrolled in this study. The ORR of fruquintinib group (n=55) and regorafenib group (n=50) were 6.1% and 2.0%; the DCR were 65.3% and 54.2%, respectively. There was no significant difference in median OS (mOS) and PFS (mPFS) between the two groups (mOS:14.2 vs12.0 months, p=0.057; mPFS:4.4 vs 3.5 months, p=0.150). Combined immunotherapy showed a synergistic effect. The mPFS and mOS of fruquintinib combined with anti-PD-1 therapy were longer than those of fruquintinib monotherapy (mPFS:5.9 vs 3.0 months, p=0.009; mOS:17.5 vs 11.3 months, p=0.008). The mOS of patients treated with regorafenib combined with anti-PD-1 therapy was 14.8 months higher than that of regorafenib monotherapy (p=0.045). When combined with anti-PD-1 therapy, the mPFS and mOS of fruquintinib was significantly longer than regorafenib (mPFS:5.9 vs 3.8 months, p=0.018; mOS:17.5 vs 14.8 months, p=0.044). In the treatment sequence, the OS of patients treated with regorafenib and then fruquintinib was significantly longer than that of the reverse treatment sequence (15.0 vs 8.3 months, p=0.019). The adverse reactions were generally similar, but the incidence of hand-foot syndrome of regorafenib was higher than that of fruquintinib, while fruquintinib was more prone to grade 3 hypertension.ConclusionFruquintinib monotherapy showed better disease control rate and objective remission rate in the post-line therapy of metastasis colorectal cancer. Notably, the combination of PD-1 immunotherapy brought the additional effect, especially in the fruquintinib combined with anti-PD-1 therapy. Patients treated with regorafenib and then fruquintinib was significantly longer than that of the reverse treatment sequence. The toxicity of fruquintinib and regorafenib are similar.

Project description:Background: Second-line treatment with ramucirumab+FOLFIRI improved overall survival (OS) versus placebo+FOLFIRI for patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (CRC) [hazard ratio (HR)=0.84, 95% CI 0.73-0.98, P = 0.022]. Post hoc analyses of RAISE patient data examined the association of RAS/RAF mutation status and the anatomical location of the primary CRC tumour (left versus right) with efficacy parameters.Patients and methodsPatient tumour tissue was classified as BRAF mutant, KRAS/NRAS (RAS) mutant, or RAS/BRAF wild-type. Left-CRC was defined as the splenic flexure, descending and sigmoid colon, and rectum; right-CRC included transverse, ascending colon, and cecum.ResultsRAS/RAF mutation status was available for 85% of patients (912/1072) and primary tumour location was known for 94.4% of patients (1012/1072). A favourable and comparable ramucirumab treatment effect was observed for patients with RAS mutations (OS HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.71-1.04) and patients with RAS/BRAF wild-type tumours (OS HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.64-1.14). Among the 41 patients with BRAF-mutated tumours, the ramucirumab benefit was more notable (OS HR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.25-1.13), although, as with the other genetic sub-group analyses, differences were not statistically significant. Progression-free survival (PFS) data followed the same trend. Treatment-by-mutation status interaction tests (OS P = 0.523, PFS P = 0.655) indicated that the ramucirumab benefit was not statistically different among the mutation sub-groups, although the small sample size of the BRAF group limited the analysis. Addition of ramucirumab to FOLFIRI improved left-CRC median OS by 2.5 month over placebo (HR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.68-0.97); median OS for ramucirumab-treated patients with right-CRC was 1.1 month over placebo (HR = 0.97, 95% CI 0.75-1.26). The treatment-by-sub-group interaction was not statistically significant for tumour sidedness (P = 0.276).ConclusionsIn the RAISE study, the addition of ramucirumab to FOLFIRI improved patient outcomes, regardless of RAS/RAF mutation status, and tumour sidedness. Ramucirumab treatment provided a numerically substantial benefit in BRAF-mutated tumours, although the P-values were not statistically significant.Clinicaltrials.gov numberNCT01183780.

Project description:ObjectivesRegorafenib improved overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) refractory to standard therapies in two randomised, phase III trials, but has not been evaluated in Turkey. REGARD evaluated the safety and efficacy of regorafenib in Turkish patients with treatment-refractory mCRC.DesignOpen-label, single-arm, phase IIIb study conducted between July 2013 and April 2015.Setting11 tertiary centres in Turkey.ParticipantsEligible patients were adults with mCRC who had disease progression within 3 months after receiving their last dose of approved standard therapies and who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1. Patients were excluded if they had previously received regorafenib. Of 139 patients screened, 100 were treated and completed the study, and all 100 were analysed. Fifty-eight per cent were male.InterventionsPatients received oral regorafenib, 160 mg once daily, for the first 3 weeks of each 4-week cycle until disease progression, death or unacceptable toxicity.Primary and secondary outcome measuresThe primary endpoint was safety, assessed by incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Progression-free survival (PFS) per investigator was the primary efficacy endpoint. There were no secondary endpoints.ResultsThe median treatment duration was 2.5 months (range 0.1 to 20.6). Ninety-six per cent of patients had at least one TEAE and 77% had a grade ≥3 TEAE. The most common grade ≥3 regorafenib-related TEAEs were hypophosphataemia (11%), fatigue (8%), hyperbilirubinaemia (6%), hand-foot skin reaction (5%), hypertension (5%), anorexia (5%) and increased alanine aminotransferase (5%). TEAEs led to dose reduction in 30% of patients. Regorafenib-related TEAEs led to treatment discontinuation in 17% of patients. Median PFS was 3.1 months (95% CI 2.9 to 3.8).ConclusionThe regorafenib safety profile and PFS in REGARD were consistent with the results of previous trials of regorafenib in mCRC. Regorafenib is an option for patients in Turkey with treatment-refractory mCRC.Trial registration numberNCT01853319, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Project description:BackgroundAt present, there are no definitive optimal treatment options for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) following first-line treatment failure. To maximize the survival benefit of patients, we compared the combination therapy of regorafenib and programmed death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors with regorafenib monotherapy as a second-line treatment for patients with advanced HCC.MethodsOur multicenter retrospective study evaluated consecutive patients with advanced HCC who received regorafenib plus PD-1 inhibitors or regorafenib alone as a later-line therapy from May 2019 to January 2022. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints included the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and safety. Efficacy was evaluated using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 criteria, and safety was assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v5.0.ResultsA total of 133 patients were included in the study (regardless of first-line treatment), including 94 who received regorafenib plus PD-1 inhibitors and 39 who received regorafenib. The regorafenib plus PD-1 inhibitors group had a significantly higher ORR (25.53% vs. 10.26%, P=0.015), higher DCR (87.23% vs. 66.67%, P=0.006), and longer PFS (median 9.0 vs. 4.0 months, P<0.0001) than the regorafenib group. Meanwhile, the median OS (mOS) did not differ between the regorafenib plus PD-1 and regorafenib monotherapy groups {mOS, 14.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 14.0-16.0 months] vs. 12.0 months (95% CI, 10.0-22.0 months)}. There was no notable difference in the total incidence of treatment-related adverse effects (TRAEs) (71.79% vs. 78.72%, P=0.39) and the incidence of grade 3/4 serious adverse effects (5.13% vs. 18.09%, P=0.19) between the regorafenib monotherapy group and PD-1 inhibitors combination group.ConclusionsCompared with regorafenib alone, regorafenib combined with PD-1 inhibitors therapy increased PFS, ORR but did not improve OS, and can be used an option in second-line HCC therapy, regardless of first-line treatments. Regorafenib combined with PD-1 inhibitors is recommended as early as a second-line therapy to benefit patients. The combination regimen was as safe as regorafenib monotherapy for treatment of HCC in patients with compensated liver disease [Child-Turcotte-Pugh (CTP) A/B].

Dataset Information

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib as beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an adjusted indirect meta-analysis and systematic review.

Publications

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib as beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: an adjusted indirect meta-analysis and systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets